RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-00442
            INDEX CODE:  105.00
      XXXXXXXXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His court-martial be overturned, his flight status be  returned  and  he  be
allowed to retire as a pilot.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His record shows he has had an exemplary career serving the  Air  Force  for
nineteen and a half years in peacetime as well as in combat.  This  was  his
first and only ever offense.  The court-martial transcript as  well  as  the
character letters written on his behalf show that he maintained a  level  of
morality and integrity that far surpasses the standard.   In  light  of  his
service record, dismissal  from  the  Air  Force  was  not  the  appropriate
disposition for this case.  The affair was not egregious.  The  relationship
lasted less  than  three  months  and  was  well  over  prior  to  the  wing
leadership  initiating  an  investigation.   The   OSI   investigation   was
careless, unprofessional, and disingenuous.  The OSI spent  countless  hours
over the course of a month surveilling, interviewing, and investigating  the
allegations against him.  The OSI  was  not  able  to  obtain  any  evidence
against him except for the statement to go with the rumors  from  the  major
and lieutenant who started everything.  He was coerced into pleading  guilty
in the court-martial.  From the moment he went to  the  ADC,  he  was  never
allowed to try to give his side of the story to the commander  in  order  to
try to mitigate the snowball effect that was inflexibly leading him  towards
a court-martial.

He loves to fly and had flown for nearly 18 years  straight,  and  that  was
taken away from him.  His pride was also taken.  He can not get a  job  with
the airlines; in fact, he is having difficulty getting a job at all  due  to
the nature  of  the  discharge.   More  importantly,  his  family  has  been
excessively punished.  They have no health or dental insurance.  No  income.
 They are on the verge of losing everything; their home, their  friends  and
their life as they know it.  It is for  them  that  he  requests  the  Board
carefully consider his petition.

In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement  and  the
Record of Trial Volumes 1-5.  His complete submission, with attachments,  is
at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered the active  duty  Air  Force  on  1  Mar  88  and  was
progressively promoted to the grade of  major,  having  assumed  that  grade
effective and with a date of rank of 1 May 99.  The applicant  was  an  F-16
pilot.

On 13 Jun 06, he was tried by a general court-martial and  found  guilty  of
the following offenses:  violating a lawful general regulation in  violation
of Article 92,  Uniform  Code  of  Military  Justice  (UCMJ)  by  wrongfully
establishing, developing or  conducting  a  personal,  intimate  and  sexual
relationship with a member  of  a  student's  immediate  family;  committing
adultery in violation of Article 134, UCMJ, by having sexual intercourse  on
divers occasions with a married  woman  not  his  wife;  committing  conduct
unbecoming of an officer and a gentleman in violation of Article 133,  UCMJ,
by engaging in a personal, intimate and sexual relationship  with  a  member
of a student's immediate family, while he was a member of the  faculty;  and
violating Article 90, UCMJ, by failing to  obey  lawful  commands  from  his
superior commissioned officers to remain at least 100  feet  away  from  the
married woman not his wife.

His  sentence,  adjudged  on  14  Jun  06,  was  confinement  for  30  days,
forfeiture of $1,000 pay per month for 6 months and a reprimand.  On 10  Jan
07, a Board of  Inquiry  was  convened  and  recommended  the  applicant  be
discharged from the Air Force and his discharge be  characterized  as  under
honorable conditions.

On 27 Aug 07, the applicant’s discharge was executed.  He served  19  years,
4 months, and 27 days of active duty.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to his discharge and  court-martial,
are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the  Air
Force at Exhibits C and D.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

AFLOA/JAJM  recommends  denial.   JAJM  states  that   the   applicant   was
represented by a Military Defense Counsel throughout  the  pretrial,  trial,
and post-trial process in addition to hiring a civilian defense attorney  of
his own choosing.  The applicant chose a jury consisting of officer  members
and pled guilty to all the charges and  specifications.   JAJM  states  that
based upon applicable law, the Board is without the authority to  set  aside
the finding of guilty.  The applicant pled guilty of his own  free  will  to
all the charges and specifications.  A review of his factual explanation  to
the  judge  of  why  he  believed  he  was  guilty  of   all   charges   and
specifications likewise illustrates that his current contentions that he  is
not guilty of those offenses is baseless and disingenuous.

While clemency may be granted, the applicant provides no  justification  for
his request,  and  clemency  is  not  warranted  in  this  case.   Prior  to
accepting the applicant's guilty plea  the  military  judge  made  sure  the
applicant was aware that he faced up to the maximum punishment based on  his
plea of guilty alone.  The complete AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial.  DPSOS states that based on the  documentation
on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was  consistent  with
the procedural and substantive requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation.
The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority  and  the
applicant has not provided any evidence or facts warranting a change to  his
discharge.  The complete AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the  applicant  on  18
Apr 08 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this  office
has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided  by  existing  law  or
regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of error or injustice.  After a thorough review  of  the  evidence
presented, we find  no  evidence  of  an  error  that  occurred  during  the
applicant's trial by court-martial or during his discharge  processing,  and
we are not persuaded by his uncorroborated assertions that he has  been  the
victim of an injustice.  In our view, the applicant's contentions have  been
adequately addressed by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility  and
we adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the  applicant
has failed to sustain his burden of proof of  the  existence  of  either  an
error  or  injustice  warranting  corrective  action.    Therefore,   absent
persuasive evidence to  the  contrary,  we  find  no  basis  upon  which  to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of material error  or  injustice;  that  the  application  was
denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only  be
reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant  evidence  not
considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered  Docket  Number  BC-2008-00442
in Executive Session on 17 Jun 08, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                  Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
                 Ms. Barbara J. Barger, Member

The following documentary evidence  pertaining  to  Docket  Number  BC-2008-
00442 was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Jan 08, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 14 Feb 08.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 28 Mar 08.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Apr 08.





                                             JAY H. JORDAN
                                             Panel Chair